Part 1 of 2 : Megawati, terrorism, UN and security community

J. Soedjati Djiwandono, Political Analyst, Jakarta

The following commentary will focus on three main themes of President Megawati Soekarnoputri's speech before the 58th United Nations' General Assembly last Sept. 23. These are the issues of terrorism, of the UN as a world organization and, though only briefly referred to, Megawati's concept of an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) "security community".

These themes have been chosen because of the apparent inconsistency, ambivalence, even contradiction, and lack of understanding contained therein that marked Megawati's entire speech.

In his address to Congress after the tragedy of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, President George W. Bush gave a stern warning to the world: "Either you are with us, or with the terrorists." He seemed to be treating world politics according to the old pattern of bipolarization, like during the now defunct Cold War, thus recreating a new international politics on the basis of terrorism.

On the issue of terrorism, Megawati said in her address, "For quite a long time we believed that international terrorism would spare Indonesia because we had a tradition of tolerance for human differences. Now, however, we must face the reality that Indonesia has become a target of terrorism and, as a result, has suffered enormous losses in human lives."

This is an implicit admission, or at least an assumption, that a number of acts of terrorism directed at various targets in Indonesia since Sept. 11 were linked to international terror networks; while in Indonesia itself that has yet to be proven.

Indeed, the President noted that "the terrorists -- who are few but fanatical -- often claim that they are fighting in the name of Islam". They have to be a mere minority, since Islam -- which teaches equality, justice and the kinship shared by all humankind -- cannot possibly endorse the indiscriminate killing of innocent individuals.

As in other Muslim countries, adherents of "mainstream" Islam in Indonesia practice moderation and are strongly opposed to violence. However, Megawati also said, "Although they are a small splinter from the large Indonesian community of Muslim[s], the perpetrators of those terrorist acts represent a branch of international terrorism."

To be sure, Megawati did not refer to terrorism on behalf of Islam, as many do in Indonesia, with the largest Islamic community in the world, associating it with the Palestinians in their conflict with Israel, which is based on an incorrect perception, as if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of religion -- ignoring the large number of non-Muslims among the Palestinians.

However, she did link terrorism to the role or policies of the U.S. in the Middle East (meaning apparently not only the Israeli- Palestinian conflict, but also the Iraqi war), which has been the main source of the injustice that has primarily motivated terrorism.

She said, "The motives and justifying arguments of their movement apparently arise from the prolonged unjust attitude exhibited by big powers toward countries which [sic.] inhabitants profess Islam, particularly in resolving the Middle East conflict.

"We should truly be prudent and sensible in the face of such a long outstanding issue. It is difficult to refute the impression that the policy on conflict resolution in the Middle East is not only unjust but also one-sided. Clearly, the Middle East problem is not a conflict of religions or of religious adherents, though there might be some religious nuances to the issue."

She added: "We all must admit that the absence of a just attitude ... in addition to the deficiency of formal means to channel aspirations, has cultivated a climate in which violence can grow.

"In our view, this is actually the seed and root of the problem ... and leads to devastating and tragic acts of terror .... The war in the Middle East [referring to the Iraqi war] a few months ago is [sic.] just another reflection of the situation."

The countries whose citizens have become the main target of terrorist groups should review their conventional antiterrorism policies, particularly in dealing with the Arab-Israeli conflict. They should adopt a policy that ensures that all involved parties are given just and equal treatment.

Indeed, so many eminent Muslims here believe that once the major powers behave in a more just manner and make clear their impartiality in the Middle East, then most of the root causes of terrorism perpetrated in the name of Islam "would have been resolved".

Terrorism is now an international or even global threat to humanity. But there is a significant difference in the degree of terrorism faced by Indonesia and that faced by the U.S.

If there is indeed a kind of terrorism motivated by Islam in Indonesia, mostly it does not, until proven otherwise, go beyond national boundaries. It is limited to militant Islamic groups striving to establish an Islamic state, or at least to impose Islamic sharia law by violent means.

By contrast, the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, in the U.S. was believed to have been perpetrated by al-Qaeda under Osama bin Laden, who was fighting in the name of Islam against the U.S. and its interests all over the world. He uses terror to try and get rid of the U.S. presence in the Middle East, particularly Saudi Arabia, protector of the two holy cities Islam, Mecca and Medina (Paul L. William, Al Qaeda: Brotherhood of Terror, Alpha Books and Pearson Education, Inc., 2002) Bin Laden is also opposed to the Saudi regime and other Arab regimes such as Egypt, which he thinks are not Islamic but mere U.S. puppets. While the U.S. presence is associated with Israel's conflict with Palestine, Israel itself has never been a target of terrorist attacks by al-Qaeda (Peter L. Bergen, Holy War, Inc: Inside the Secret World of Osama bin Laden, London: Phoenix, 2002).

It has been said, however, that bin Laden's movement also has a global scope directed at the U.S. as a manifestation of representative of the Western (Christian) world. In that sense al-Qaeda forms part of the global movement of Islamic fundamentalism.

This kind of fundamentalism strives after the establishment of a new world order based on Islamic civilization to substitute the Western civilization that dominates the present world order, wrote Bassam Tibi in The Challenge of Fundamentalism: Political Islam and the New World Disorder (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998).

Something the late Ahmad Khomeini, the Ayatollah's son -- who died suddenly just as he was assuming the mantle of his father -- said in late 1991 emphasized the fatefulness of the inevitable struggle with the U.S.: "We should realize that the world is hostile toward us only for [our commitment to] Islam. After the fall of Marxism, Islam replaced it, and as long as Islam exists, U.S. hostility exists, and as long as U.S. hostility exists, the struggle exists." (Yossef Bodansky, Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America 1999).